Son of Butch
Well-known member
how is over 6 frame perfect female maker?
Proven female makers
- Thread starter cattletalk
- Start date
Help Support CattleToday:
Frame size doesn't make a maternal cow. The idea a maternal cow has to be a 4.5 frame 1,00-1,200 lb cow is nothing more than the opinion of some. A cow can be a 6.0 frame and weigh 1,400-1,500 lbs and be maternal. She can also be efficient. Our environment requires a high volume cow. Our market requires average frame. The toads get docked heavily. We want low input cows that will wean a 700 lb str at 6-7 months with no creep. We have consistently had cow productive into their mid to late teens. No one type and size of cow works best everywhere.
Farm Family
Well-known member
You are correct a large udder does not = milk production.
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2015
- Messages
- 454
- Reaction score
- 304
Worrying about high tailheads should be way down the list of things to worry about in my opinion.
Dave I don't prefer them but I agree there is way more serious issues than a slightly higher railhead. Feet and legs are two of them.
Son of Butch
Well-known member
I believe in letting the cow tell you what works best for them.
How can this be done?
IF lifetime pounds weaned records were available then comparison of traits for high and low groups would tell us.
Since I know of no data base with that information, have to use what has been researched.
Tooth retention.
That has been researched and the findings were crossbred cows retain their teeth longer than purebreds.
One of the advantages F1s have over purebreds is longer lasting teeth, the foundation of nutritional intake and correlates
with higher fertility.
How can this be done?
IF lifetime pounds weaned records were available then comparison of traits for high and low groups would tell us.
Since I know of no data base with that information, have to use what has been researched.
Tooth retention.
That has been researched and the findings were crossbred cows retain their teeth longer than purebreds.
One of the advantages F1s have over purebreds is longer lasting teeth, the foundation of nutritional intake and correlates
with higher fertility.
Last edited:
It's about structure in general. If the trailhead is high the rest of the hip and hind leg is out of place also. Joint angles are an important factor in longevity. In this particular case even the Select Sires reps talk about it. In the future I will keep my personal opinions about such to myself.
Ebenezer
Well-known member
There is some question for me that we should expect one type to do it all. Thus, WB pretty well nailed it. The carcass and growth quest has changed the breed. Then we see how few bulls get named over a period of a week as proven maternal types without some fault or concern. Oddly, average national weaning weights have not climbed and breed back on cows and % calf crops probably are not improved either. So has the push for what the push has been for been the best?
I agree that if we are raising seedstock or commercial replacements that a core herd is the way to go. There are good cows but they fall into two groups: able to replicate themselves or cannot replicate themselves. It is just the gene combination they got at conception and it depends on the stability of that combination. The longer we stay in the business, however, the larger % of the herd should be the core herd. If not, we are culling and keeping the wrong cattle.
I am not going to argue the buying sale barn cows for the value of money flow, depreciation, heifer costs... My real reason: I market and not outright pound out cows and heifers I consider to be culls. I hold them, breed them, carry them to 2nd or 3rd trimester and sell them in the barn as bred cows in the weekly sale. They are good looking cows and well fleshed when they sell. There are real reasons that I cull them. These same reasons are things that the buyers should also not want. But a lot of them are bought and taken to the farms by individuals. If individuals or the barn guys ask, I'll tell why I am selling them. That is why I cannot see barn cow as the way to go.
The two herds/one herd comment or the concern of a bull that is maternal more than paternal or visa versa is more of a discussion. I was raised like elkwc to expect do-all cattle. After some years of discussions with the late Larry Leonhardt, I have no problem identifying maternal type bulls and taking full advantage of them. He morphed to the opinion that there should be a two type beef breeding effort for maximum profits and efficient production for commercial cattle folks. Yet, his maternal type steers still graded well. I have a true maternal type bull on the farm now. His daughters are quite a prize. I held most of the steers from him over winter and they sold great in March. It can work and work well.
Just for discussion, and likely a repeat of past discussions: the dairy industry focuses on the cow and the bulls are mere byproducts. They have greatly improved cow production. And the laying hen business is the same. The pullets are the focus and I am pretty sure the male chicks are euthanized at the hatcheries. So these two models do not parallel the beef programs. But the broiler, turkey and hog industry are the main competitors. They use maternal/paternal breeding. They are quite efficient, can tweak the feed intake and the growth rates with their systems. Can we compare do-all beef programs to two line broilers and hogs? I honestly think that beef folks would make more if they thought in maternal crops of calves and terminal crops of calves.
Just my opinions.
That is essentially the goal here is to stabilize the genetics of the herd so they look alike and perform alike and fit the environment and management that we provide. I really am not looking for true outliers for either phenotype or genotype. Rather contributors for small improvements.
Farm Family
Well-known member
I certainly do not like high tailheads and because of that I have avoided certain bulls Because everytime I see one of their offspring I notice a high tail head and if I guess the correct AI sire…no thanks.
In our opinion high tail heads do tend to equate to rear tilted vulvas. We have seen poorer post calving drainage which leads to breed back challenges. We have also noted high tail carriages do seem to change the carriage of the "rear wheels" and stride out.
Agreed tail heads are not the first thing we "correct" - feet and leg structure is high on the priority and maintained always but we feel a high tail head does not help structure. Udders same...easy correct as far as breeding IF you have the bull to do that job or throw a positive correction. But we do consider that top line/tail head and how it overall works in the structural base down to feet and legs and calving/breeding. A tail head in our experience is not easy to reverse.
I do agree with the dairy breeding focus on the girls. Beef puts too much carriage in the bulls. Never underestimate your dams. Utilize bulls that compliment a good foundation of females. Terminal sires is not building the foundation. Two ways of thinking and keep it that way. Stay out of the ditches when retaining females. Just my thoughts.
Last edited:
Basically each breeder needs to identify what works best in their environment, management system, market and also on their available forages. I have been involved with raising cattle in 3 different environments. What worked in one best don't in the other 2. I have also learned to watch and listen to those who have raised cattle in an area for many years and been successful.
We are a low input operation. We had pastures with 20 cows that only got 2-3 bales of hay all winter. They get liquid feed to help them utilize left over grass. We need a high volume cow to utilize poor forages. We desire a little more milk in our cows than some do in other areas. We have found if you use a high growth bull on many of the maternal bred cows you see no increase in weaning weight. The growth requires more nutrition whether it is more milk or creep feed. We have found increasing the milk for us returns more net dollars than buying creep feed. Our weaning weights have increased to our goal. All of the Hoover Dam influenced steers weaned off over 700 lbs at 7-8 months last fall. We had 3 cows that didn't wean a calf out of 110 head. We don't preg check. And one of the 3 cows lost a 3 month old calf. We have consistently had similar results for years so don't feel fertility is decreasing. Our search now is for a sire or sires too use on our Hoover Dam influenced cows and move it forward. Using bulls sired by the recent hot AI sires hasn't worked. We AIed 2 years in our quest to find one. We sampled several. We also bought a son of Growth Fund. So far the Growth Fund influence shows lots of potential. We have a Brown's Double Decker that is 7 weeks old that shows promise. When selecting a sire or new bloodlines we look for what will gives us a 700 lb weaning steer without extra inputs. We don't seek the most growth because along with that comes increased inputs. We seek the optimum growth for our environment and management system.
A two herd system may work for some. It isn't economically feasible for us. Myself and several neighbors have been successful raising a beef cow that covers all bases and not single function. The issue is there are fewer breeders raising the kind and type we need. Why many of us are now retaining bulls we raise. We are also considering other breeds besides Angus.
We are a low input operation. We had pastures with 20 cows that only got 2-3 bales of hay all winter. They get liquid feed to help them utilize left over grass. We need a high volume cow to utilize poor forages. We desire a little more milk in our cows than some do in other areas. We have found if you use a high growth bull on many of the maternal bred cows you see no increase in weaning weight. The growth requires more nutrition whether it is more milk or creep feed. We have found increasing the milk for us returns more net dollars than buying creep feed. Our weaning weights have increased to our goal. All of the Hoover Dam influenced steers weaned off over 700 lbs at 7-8 months last fall. We had 3 cows that didn't wean a calf out of 110 head. We don't preg check. And one of the 3 cows lost a 3 month old calf. We have consistently had similar results for years so don't feel fertility is decreasing. Our search now is for a sire or sires too use on our Hoover Dam influenced cows and move it forward. Using bulls sired by the recent hot AI sires hasn't worked. We AIed 2 years in our quest to find one. We sampled several. We also bought a son of Growth Fund. So far the Growth Fund influence shows lots of potential. We have a Brown's Double Decker that is 7 weeks old that shows promise. When selecting a sire or new bloodlines we look for what will gives us a 700 lb weaning steer without extra inputs. We don't seek the most growth because along with that comes increased inputs. We seek the optimum growth for our environment and management system.
A two herd system may work for some. It isn't economically feasible for us. Myself and several neighbors have been successful raising a beef cow that covers all bases and not single function. The issue is there are fewer breeders raising the kind and type we need. Why many of us are now retaining bulls we raise. We are also considering other breeds besides Angus.
I will say for those saying you can't have maternal and growth in the same animal. I would suggest that you study herds like the Byergo's. They have several herd sires under a 6.0 frame. Their herd has great longtivity and fertility. To this point I haven't used their genetics but have studied them. And at some point will likely try them. Their cattle are what I call true beef cattle. They aren't single function. I mention them because many of you may not know some of the other breeders I could mention.
I don't think anyone on this thread said you can't have both maternal and growth. Most of us do realize that we are better off from a maternal standpoint to not to maximize any single trait. We can see more improvement by breeding closer to the middle than trying to continuously select for outliers. The bell shape curve comes to mind on population genetics. As far as phenotype you and I are looking for different things. Please don't take it personally but we are looking as this quite a bit differently.
Travlr
Well-known member
I think there's a basic misunderstanding, perhaps instigated by what I posted about bull selection for specific purposes.
I don't mean to say that any bull I would use can't throw great heifers or superior weaning weights... both. What I'm saying is that I differentiate between bulls. In any group of bulls there are going to be differences. I don't care how many or what breeds or whatever... I'll evaluate them for specific needs and use them accordingly. A great heifer producing bull is still going to have a significant number of male progeny, so I wouldn't discount that fact, just as I wouldn't always discount the heifers from a bull that I intend for terminal calves. But if the bull performs as expected the terminal calves will be more likely to go to feedlots and those bred for replacements will be more likely to be held as breeders.
We can see a pretty good example of a dual purpose and dual body type breed in Shorthorns. And I like Shorthorns a lot. But it seems they get a lot of disrespect at the point of sale for no good reason, IMO. If you have a bunch of dairy type Shorthorns and put a beefy, muscle-maker on them you'll get calves that will do good as replacements and as terminal crosses. If you have the beef type Shorthorns you will get different calves depending on what kind of bull you select... just like with any other beef type breed.
War Party fits all your criteria. If I ever dabble in AI again, he's on my list.
genebrokers.com
Werner War Party 1472 - Gene Brokers
View video here. Stemming from the Dixie Erica lineage, 1472 sires sons which achieve high satisfaction ratings for their exceptional hoof structure, excellent dispositions and muscling and masculinity, while his extremely feminine and shapely daughters are noted for their productivity. His 64...
genebrokers.com
Actually that was a son.. I'd go with the original:War Party fits all your criteria. If I ever dabble in AI again, he's on my list.
Werner War Party 1472 - Gene Brokers
View video here. Stemming from the Dixie Erica lineage, 1472 sires sons which achieve high satisfaction ratings for their exceptional hoof structure, excellent dispositions and muscling and masculinity, while his extremely feminine and shapely daughters are noted for their productivity. His 64...
Werner War Party 2417 | Universal Semen Sales
I feel where the misunderstanding starts is you are like many. You label them as maternal or terminal. I feel there is at least a third label. It is a true beef cow or bull. A dual purpose cow or bull. I would never select or use a single trait, single function cow or bull. Like I mentioned above. There are several breeders that breed and raise cattle that fit both criteria. I will continue to breed them. The only somewhat single function bull we keep in a heifer bull. He sires above average growth and above average steers and heifers. We also use him on mature cows.
Travlr
Well-known member
Well that went right over your head.
No it didn't go over my head. You keep talking about breeding for maternal or terminal. I breed for both. That seems to keep going over your head. That is one reason our heifers sell with the steers price wise.
Travlr
Well-known member
(Facepalm) And here I am thinking we are really saying the same thing in different ways...
